Cyd-destun gwleidyddol y ddadl ynghylch erthyliad

Rwy'n credu bod Kenan Malik yn un o'm hoff sylwebwyr erbyn hyn. Rwy'n hoff iawn yn enwedig o'r ysgrif yma ganddo, sy'n ymateb i ymdrech Mehdi Hasan i bortreadu'r safbwynt gwrth-erthylu fel yr un asgell chwith go iawn (a vice versa, wrth gwrs).

Gellir crynhoi safbwynt Hasan trwy ddyfynnu'r ddau baragraff yma:

Abortion is one of those rare political issues on which left and right seem to have swapped ideologies: right-wingers talk of equality, human rights and “defending the innocent”, while left-wingers fetishise “choice”, selfishness and unbridled individualism.

“My body, my life, my choice.” Such rhetoric has always left me perplexed. Isn’t socialism about protecting the weak and vulnerable, giving a voice to the voiceless? Who is weaker or more vulnerable than the unborn child? Which member of our society needs a voice more than the mute baby in the womb?

Mae hynny'n amlwg yn hurt yn fy marn i, ond mae'r modd y mae Malik wedi gallu dangos pam yn arbennig o eglur. Fel y dywed, y pwynt y mae gwrthwynebwyr erthyliad yn methu'n lân â'i ddeall yw mai mater o ymreolaeth y fenyw dros ei chorff ei hun yw'r ddadl mewn gwirionedd. Amcan y gwrthwynewbwyr yw atal hawl hanner y boblogaeth i reoli eu cyfarpar atgenhedlu eu hunain. Mae gwarchod yr hawl hwnnw felly yn sicr yn un rhyddfrydol ac egalitaraidd (ac sydd felly, yn ôl y confensiwn sydd ohoni, yn safbwynt sy'n perthyn yn gyfforddus iawn i'r chwith wleidyddol).

Mae'n braf pan mae rhywun yn ysgrifennu'n huawdl am rywbeth sydd wedi troelli'n ddigyswllt yn eich pen ers peth amser. Teimlad felly a gefais wrth ddarllen yr isod gan Malik:

A fetus is a physical part of woman’s body. That is why we talk of ‘a woman’s right to choose’. Abortion is not about the killing of another human being but about a woman exercising her right to control her own body. The moral status of a fetus that is wanted, and that the woman sees as an unborn child, is different from the moral status of an unwanted fetus that she wishes to abort. Most societies recognize this in the moral and legal distinctions they draw between the abortion of an unwanted fetus and the killing of a wanted one.

Birth transforms that relationship. An entirely physical attachment becomes primarily, and increasingly, social. A fetus is an extension of the physical body of a woman. A newborn is part of the moral community of humans. Its moral status no longer depends upon the desires of the woman but derives from its membership of the moral community. In that change lies the moral difference between a fetus and a newborn, and between abortion and murder.

To put it another way, to be human is not simply a matter of biology, as Hasan and other pro-lifers seem to assert. Certainly there are physical, biological, genetic markers and boundaries that define us as human. But one also becomes human through a process by which we are socialized into the human community. To ignore that is to ignore a fundamental aspect of human existence that, to the left, is vitally important.

Rwyf wedi pwysleisio'r darn mwyaf allweddol un. Os yw'r fenyw eisiau cael y babi, ac yn paratoi'n emosiynol i roi geni i blentyn, mae hynny ynddo'i hun yn gwneud y ffetws yn fwy arwyddocaol o lawer. Os nad ydyw eisiau babi, fodd bynnag, nid yw'n ddim mwy na thyfiant yn ei chroth. Mae'n ran o'i chorff hi ei hun, ac os yw hi'n dymuno cael ei wared, ni ddylai fod gan unrhyw un yr hawl i'w rhwystro.

Darllenwch yr ysgrif gyfan. Beth yw eich barn?